Jul 19, 2004 3:16pm
Re: viewing these films is just the BEGINNING of the learning
While I respect Ridetheory's incredibly valid opinion, I must explain my brief post to Cashel.
Obviously, every film is unique and, in a way, every filmmaker, even a parent with a bouncy camcorder, records a unique event or a unique aspect of a common event with every film they make. My statement didn't apply to them.
I didn't mean that that parent is a great filmmaker for filming their child on Christmas morning. I mean that well before camcorders were invented, the first guy to use real Kodakchrome to film his kids open presents was a unique and a good filmmaker. Nobody recorded the minute details of life quite like Besse did, and definitely not during that time period; therefore I consider him a good filmmaker.
And certainly it goes the other way; those who record the obscene limits of the human experience just to shock is not a good filmmaker, even if what he films is unique. Of course, if he intends a message beyond the shock value, I might re-evaluate that statement.
In short, Thomas Edison was good filmmaker for filming a few frames of boxers in a ring, not because of any great filmmaking techniques, but just because he was one of the first, and Larry Flynt can film as many lewd sex acts as he wants to, but just because he put them on film first doesn't make him a good filmmaker.
In shorter, to be first is to be good, unless that first is patently offensive and unartistic.
That's just my opinion. I guess we can drop it now.
EDIT: Oh, and as to the unviewability issues, Stan Brakhage is unviewable. So was Andy Warhol, and yet they are considered significant filmmakers in spite of themselves. Maybe not quite directly on topic. Anyway, I apologize again to ridetheory.
This post was modified by tambora on 2004-07-19 22:16:41